Yes, you are right about the versions wording, thanks for clarification. A performance improvement can be considered a bugfix as well. I see no big risks in including PR's by Haibin and Lin into the patch release.
@Haibin, if you can reopen the PR's they should be good to go for the relase, considering the importance of the improvements. I propose the following bugfixes for the release as well (already created corresponding PR's): Fixed __setattr__ method of _MXClassPropertyMetaClass (v1.3.x) https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13157 fixed symbols naming in RNNCell, LSTMCell, GRUCell (v1.3.x) https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13158 We will be starting to merge the PR's shortly. If are no more proposals for backporting I would consider the list as set. Best Anton ср, 7 нояб. 2018 г. в 17:01, Sheng Zha <szha....@gmail.com>: > Hi Anton, > > I hear your concern about a simultaneous 1.4.0 release and it certainly is > a valid one. > > Regarding the release, let’s agree on the language first. According to > semver.org, 1.3.1 release is considered patch release, which is for > backward compatible bug fixes, while 1.4.0 release is considered minor > release, which is for backward compatible new features. A major release > would mean 2.0. > > The three PRs suggested by Haibin and Lin are all introducing new > features. If they go into a patch release, it would require an exception > accepted by the community. Also, if other violation happens it could be > ground for declining a release during votes. > > -sz > > > On Nov 7, 2018, at 2:25 AM, Anton Chernov <mecher...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > [MXNET-1179] Enforce deterministic algorithms in convolution layers >
